Both chambers of the US Congress have quietly approved a bill that seeks tough new restrictions on military aid to Pakistan, aides told Dawn on Wednesday. The bill comes up for final approval later this week.
Democratic Senator Robert Menendez and Republican Senator Bob Corker jointly crafted the new restrictions.
‘The Senate approved the bill on July 24 while the House of Representatives passed it earlier this month,’ an aide for Senator Corker told Dawn.
In the US legislative system, the House and the Senate work separately, which requires both chambers to craft their own versions of a proposed bill. After separate votes, the two versions are reconciled in a joint session, which is called the conference.
The proposed amendment to the National Defence Authorisation Act comes to conference later this week. If approved, as expected, it would become a law.
An earlier joint statement by the offices of the two senators said that they had successfully attached an amendment to the Department of Defence authorisation bill that passed the Senate ‘in order to help ensure that military assistance for Pakistan is actually being used for its purpose: to fight the Taliban and Al Qaeda’.
The Menendez-Corker legislative language would mandate a certification by the US Secretary of State and Secretary of Defence, before Pakistan is reimbursed with Coalition Support Funds, that the payment is both in the national security interests of the US, and will not affect the balance of power in the region.
‘To this point, almost eight years and more than seven billion in American taxpayer dollars for Pakistan’s military have not prevented the Taliban and Al Qaeda from regrouping along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border,’ said Senator Menendez.
‘The fight against these extremists is crucial for our own security, which is why we have to certify that our support is in fact doing what we intend it to do and is not being used for other purposes.’
Mr Menendez insisted that this was an issue of national security and of responsibility with taxpayer dollars and that’s why he was seeking to further tighten the restrictions on Pakistan.
Senator Corker said that the US appreciated the important role Pakistan had played in America’s fight to eliminate the terrorist safe havens within their borders, ‘we also owe it to our service members and the American taxpayer to ensure that the funds provided to Pakistan out of the Coalition Support Funds are in fact being directed towards those efforts and not misdirected’.
The fresh limits include efforts to track where US military hardware sent to Pakistan ends up, as well as a warning that US aid to Pakistan must not upset ‘the balance of power in the region’ —a reference to tensions with India.
The limits are in a $680 billion US Defence Department spending measure for 2010 that the Senate will take up after the bill cleared the House of Representatives in a 281-146 vote on Oct 8.
If, as expected, the Senate approves the legislation, it will go to President Barack Obama to sign into law who earlier this month signed the Kerry-Lugar bill into a law.
Although the Kerry-Lugar bill tripled US economic assistance to Pakistan, it also placed some restrictions on the military aid.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
We are Peaceful and Peace lovers Khattaks
We are peaceful and peace lovers khattaks in Khattakistan. We always depend upon on peace and avoid violence. We are educated,hard working,dedicated and patriotic Pakistanis.We disliked those who are misguided and anti Pakistan elements.
NO BODY CAN DENIED THIS THAT WE ALL ARE NOT ONLY EDUCATED BUT PEACE LOVING AND PEACEFUL PEOPLES OF THE PAKISTAN.KARAK IS HEAVEN IN THIS TROUBLE FULL TIME.WE ARE GOOD MUSLIMS,BEST PASHTOONS AND PATRIOTICS PAKISTANI.WE KNOW HOW TO ACT AND REACT.WE ARE MASTERS OF OURSELVES AND WE DON’T ACCEPT MASTERMINDING OF OTHERS. ALLAH MAY GUIDE US TO BE HELPING HANDS HUMANITY. Let us respect our elders guidance and love our values and honor our virtues. The value of Live and let others live.
NO BODY CAN DENIED THIS THAT WE ALL ARE NOT ONLY EDUCATED BUT PEACE LOVING AND PEACEFUL PEOPLES OF THE PAKISTAN.KARAK IS HEAVEN IN THIS TROUBLE FULL TIME.WE ARE GOOD MUSLIMS,BEST PASHTOONS AND PATRIOTICS PAKISTANI.WE KNOW HOW TO ACT AND REACT.WE ARE MASTERS OF OURSELVES AND WE DON’T ACCEPT MASTERMINDING OF OTHERS. ALLAH MAY GUIDE US TO BE HELPING HANDS HUMANITY. Let us respect our elders guidance and love our values and honor our virtues. The value of Live and let others live.
Monday, August 3, 2009
It is shame
woreds are not enough to condemn the barberic and horrific incident that has takent place in Gojra.The innocent women and childern are burnt alive safeguard islam.but the cruel dnt know abt islam.We muslim community are ashamed for this very barbarism and condemn it.To us Islam is the religion of peace and love.
Friday, July 31, 2009
New dawn....A dawn of happiness and Light
The Supreme Court of Pakistan Friday declared the steps taken on November 3, 2007 by former president Pervez Musharraf as unconstitutional.
The judgment came after the 14-judge larger bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammed Chaudhry completed the hearing of constitutional petitions regarding PCO judges, appointments of judges of higher judiciary and November 3, 2007 steps.
The Supreme Court in its short verdict declared the steps of November 3, 2007 taken by former president Pervez Musharraf as unconstitutional. Article 279 of the Constitution was violated on November 3, 2007, it said.
It termed as illegal and unconstitutional the sacking of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and the other higher judiciary as well as the appointment of Justice Abdul Hamid Dogar as chief justice.
The oath taken by President Asif Ali Zardari will not be affected by the SC verdict, is said.
All the appointments made in the higher judiciary of Justice Abdul Hamid Dogar have been termed illegal.
It termed as unconstitutional all the appointments of judges during November 3, 2007 to March 24, 2008.
It said the strength of Supreme Court judges will remain 17.
It declared unconstitutional all the steps taken by Pervez Musharraf during November 3, 2007 to December 15, 2007 including the increasing of number of superior judges through finance bill.
Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry announced the verdict.
The verdict said all the appointments of judges on and after November 3, 2007 under PCO were unconstitutional. The case of PCO judges will be referred to the Supreme Judicial Council, it said.
The announcement of today’s verdict sent a wave of jubilation outside the Supreme Court and at all the bar associations. Sweets are being distributed as people and lawyers are chanting slogans in support of the judiciary.
The 14-judge larger bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammed Chaudhry reserved the judgment after completing the hearing of the case and announced it after a delay of over four and a half hour.
The judgment came after the 14-judge larger bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammed Chaudhry completed the hearing of constitutional petitions regarding PCO judges, appointments of judges of higher judiciary and November 3, 2007 steps.
The Supreme Court in its short verdict declared the steps of November 3, 2007 taken by former president Pervez Musharraf as unconstitutional. Article 279 of the Constitution was violated on November 3, 2007, it said.
It termed as illegal and unconstitutional the sacking of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and the other higher judiciary as well as the appointment of Justice Abdul Hamid Dogar as chief justice.
The oath taken by President Asif Ali Zardari will not be affected by the SC verdict, is said.
All the appointments made in the higher judiciary of Justice Abdul Hamid Dogar have been termed illegal.
It termed as unconstitutional all the appointments of judges during November 3, 2007 to March 24, 2008.
It said the strength of Supreme Court judges will remain 17.
It declared unconstitutional all the steps taken by Pervez Musharraf during November 3, 2007 to December 15, 2007 including the increasing of number of superior judges through finance bill.
Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry announced the verdict.
The verdict said all the appointments of judges on and after November 3, 2007 under PCO were unconstitutional. The case of PCO judges will be referred to the Supreme Judicial Council, it said.
The announcement of today’s verdict sent a wave of jubilation outside the Supreme Court and at all the bar associations. Sweets are being distributed as people and lawyers are chanting slogans in support of the judiciary.
The 14-judge larger bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammed Chaudhry reserved the judgment after completing the hearing of the case and announced it after a delay of over four and a half hour.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
General (R)Now where u will go?
ISLAMABAD: Former president Pervez Musharraf had his eight years in power and now he has got an opportunity to have his day in court as well. The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday issued a notice to the former president to appear in person or through his lawyer before the court on July 29 and defend his position on the state of emergency he declared on November 3, 2007, making over 60 independent-minded judges non-functional.
“According to principles of law, internationally known, no person should be condemned unheard; therefore, under Order 25 of Rule 9 of the Supreme Court Rules 1980, a notice be issued to Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf, however, leaving for him to appear before the court or otherwise,” Justice Chaudry said in the order.
A 14-member larger bench, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry is hearing a petition of the Sindh High Court Bar Association (SHCBA), seeking regularisation of two SHC additional judges.
Other members of the bench are Justice Javed Iqbal, Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday, Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, Justice Chaudhry Ijaz Ahmed, Justice Ghulam Rabbani, Justice Sarmad Jalal Usmani, Justice Muhammad Sair Ali, Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui and Justice Jawwad S Khawaja.
The two SHC judges were denied regularisation on the basis of the Supreme Court judgment in the Tikka Iqbal case was a “past and closed transaction”. The same judgment had also validated the imposition of emergency and the steps taken thereafter by the former president.
“According to the principles of law, universally known, no one should be condemned unheard, as it has been recognised and stated by this court in almost every case where an adverse decision was likely to take place. Not only in our country, internationally where there is a regular system of administration of justice, this principle is applied. Even when there is no provision under the law, the courts have been issuing notices under the principle of natural justice,” the court order said.
The court further ruled that in the Asma Jilani case, notice was not issued as the respondent government had not made a categorical statement that it was not defending the action of Gen Yahya Khan.
“As far as the proceedings of the case are concerned, these are going on for the last two to three days. The media, print and electronic, is widely publicising the observations and proceedings. Anyone interested in the proceedings who is concerned with the promulgation of the PCO can appear on his own by making application directly or otherwise,” the court order added.
“Therefore, under Order 25 of the Rule 9 of the Supreme Court of Pakistan Rules 1980, notice be issued to Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf: however, leaving for him to appear before the court or otherwise, hence notice be issued on the address of his residence in Islamabad,” the order concluded.
On Wednesday, the chief justice sought view of counsel for the petitioners Hamid Khan and Attorney General Sardar Latif Khan Khosa on the question of issuing notice to Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf with a view to providing him with an opportunity to defend himself in the case if he wanted so.
Hamid Khan, who is representing the Sindh High Court Bar Association, opposed issuing of notice to Musharraf, saying there was no precedence of issuing notices to former dictators in such cases and that former military ruler Yahya Khan, too, was not issued notice in the Asma Jillani case.
At this Justice Shahid Siddiqui said that there were people to defend Yahya Khan but in this case the attorney general is not defending him. Khan further contended that Musharraf was not being prosecuted, instead his constitutional actions were being examined; therefore, there was no need of issuing notices to him.
Justice Jawwad S Khawaja, however, observed that fairness demanded that Musharraf is provided with opportunity to come and defend himself. The attorney general, however, said he was leaving the matter to the court.
The chief justice remarked that if there were 0.001 per cent chance of revisiting the Tikka Iqbal case, the court would attack the Provisional Constitution Order (PCO). He said there would be fallouts and repercussions of this case, which he said would decide on the life of our nation.
“We would have to strengthen our institutions and there should be no more adventurism,” the CJ said. The chief justice further observed that the court was examining the PCO promulgated by Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf. Therefore, someone may raise fingers at us for condemning someone who was not before us, he said.
Later, Justice Justice (retd) Malik Qayyum, told reporters outside the court building that he was thinking of representing Gen (retd) Musharraf in the court if he (Musharraf) asked him to do so. Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, who was opposing Musharraf in the court in the past in a case filed against the military dictator for contesting the election for the office of the president, said that the retired general could appear before the Supreme Court either through his lawyer or in person.
“It is purely a constitutional petition and Musharraf either could appear in person or through his legal counsel; however, if the former military dictator appears in person it would be fine,” Aitzaz told Geo TV.
At the same time Aitzaz said that Musharraf would not opt to appear in person before the court for being a coward. He said that the court could issue a notice to Musharraf for appearing in person only if a criminal petition was filed in the apex court.
Aitzaz Ahsan, however, to a question refused to plead Musharraf’s case, saying that he was a cruel ruler who put over 60 judges of the superior judiciary under house arrest along with their children.
“According to principles of law, internationally known, no person should be condemned unheard; therefore, under Order 25 of Rule 9 of the Supreme Court Rules 1980, a notice be issued to Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf, however, leaving for him to appear before the court or otherwise,” Justice Chaudry said in the order.
A 14-member larger bench, headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry is hearing a petition of the Sindh High Court Bar Association (SHCBA), seeking regularisation of two SHC additional judges.
Other members of the bench are Justice Javed Iqbal, Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday, Justice Mian Shakirullah Jan, Justice Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, Justice Nasirul Mulk, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, Justice Chaudhry Ijaz Ahmed, Justice Ghulam Rabbani, Justice Sarmad Jalal Usmani, Justice Muhammad Sair Ali, Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiqui and Justice Jawwad S Khawaja.
The two SHC judges were denied regularisation on the basis of the Supreme Court judgment in the Tikka Iqbal case was a “past and closed transaction”. The same judgment had also validated the imposition of emergency and the steps taken thereafter by the former president.
“According to the principles of law, universally known, no one should be condemned unheard, as it has been recognised and stated by this court in almost every case where an adverse decision was likely to take place. Not only in our country, internationally where there is a regular system of administration of justice, this principle is applied. Even when there is no provision under the law, the courts have been issuing notices under the principle of natural justice,” the court order said.
The court further ruled that in the Asma Jilani case, notice was not issued as the respondent government had not made a categorical statement that it was not defending the action of Gen Yahya Khan.
“As far as the proceedings of the case are concerned, these are going on for the last two to three days. The media, print and electronic, is widely publicising the observations and proceedings. Anyone interested in the proceedings who is concerned with the promulgation of the PCO can appear on his own by making application directly or otherwise,” the court order added.
“Therefore, under Order 25 of the Rule 9 of the Supreme Court of Pakistan Rules 1980, notice be issued to Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf: however, leaving for him to appear before the court or otherwise, hence notice be issued on the address of his residence in Islamabad,” the order concluded.
On Wednesday, the chief justice sought view of counsel for the petitioners Hamid Khan and Attorney General Sardar Latif Khan Khosa on the question of issuing notice to Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf with a view to providing him with an opportunity to defend himself in the case if he wanted so.
Hamid Khan, who is representing the Sindh High Court Bar Association, opposed issuing of notice to Musharraf, saying there was no precedence of issuing notices to former dictators in such cases and that former military ruler Yahya Khan, too, was not issued notice in the Asma Jillani case.
At this Justice Shahid Siddiqui said that there were people to defend Yahya Khan but in this case the attorney general is not defending him. Khan further contended that Musharraf was not being prosecuted, instead his constitutional actions were being examined; therefore, there was no need of issuing notices to him.
Justice Jawwad S Khawaja, however, observed that fairness demanded that Musharraf is provided with opportunity to come and defend himself. The attorney general, however, said he was leaving the matter to the court.
The chief justice remarked that if there were 0.001 per cent chance of revisiting the Tikka Iqbal case, the court would attack the Provisional Constitution Order (PCO). He said there would be fallouts and repercussions of this case, which he said would decide on the life of our nation.
“We would have to strengthen our institutions and there should be no more adventurism,” the CJ said. The chief justice further observed that the court was examining the PCO promulgated by Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf. Therefore, someone may raise fingers at us for condemning someone who was not before us, he said.
Later, Justice Justice (retd) Malik Qayyum, told reporters outside the court building that he was thinking of representing Gen (retd) Musharraf in the court if he (Musharraf) asked him to do so. Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, who was opposing Musharraf in the court in the past in a case filed against the military dictator for contesting the election for the office of the president, said that the retired general could appear before the Supreme Court either through his lawyer or in person.
“It is purely a constitutional petition and Musharraf either could appear in person or through his legal counsel; however, if the former military dictator appears in person it would be fine,” Aitzaz told Geo TV.
At the same time Aitzaz said that Musharraf would not opt to appear in person before the court for being a coward. He said that the court could issue a notice to Musharraf for appearing in person only if a criminal petition was filed in the apex court.
Aitzaz Ahsan, however, to a question refused to plead Musharraf’s case, saying that he was a cruel ruler who put over 60 judges of the superior judiciary under house arrest along with their children.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
